R. v. Honish, [1993] 1 S.C.R. 458
Eugene Honish Appellant
v.
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Honish
File No.: 22739.
1993: February 2.
Present: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, Sopinka, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for alberta
Criminal law ‑‑ Defences ‑‑ Issue of self‑induced intoxication resulting in automatism not live here ‑‑ Case of intoxication.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal (1991), 85 Alta. L.R. (2d) 129, 120 A.R. 223, 68 C.C.C. (3d) 329, [1992] 3 W.W.R. 45, 36 M.V.R. (2d) 295, 14 W.C.B. (2d) 570, 8 W.A.C. 223, dismissing an appeal from conviction by Pinard J. Appeal dismissed.
Alexander D. Pringle, Q.C., for the appellant.
Jack Watson, for the respondent.
//Lamer C.J.//
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
Lamer C.J. ‑‑ Whether self‑induced intoxication resulting in automatism is or is not a defence, that issue is not live in this case, as we agree with the trial judge's finding of fact that this is merely a case of intoxication.
The appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Pringle, Renouf & Associates, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Alberta, Edmonton.